TALARI KONAIAHGARI PEDDA NAGANNA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by accused 2, 3 and 6 in Sessions Case No. 15 of 1964 in the Court of Session, Anantapur, who have been convicted as under : A-2 has been convicted under section 326, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years. A-3 and A-6 have been convicted each for an offence under section 324, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.

(2.) In Sessions Case No. 15 of 1964 these accused and 5 others, in all A-1 to A-8, were tried for offences of rioting and the murder of one Pedda Nagappa. The Sessions Judge acquitted five of the accused i.e., A-1, A-4, A-5, A-7 and A-8 finding that the prosecution had failed to establish that 5 or more persons had participated in the crime. He convicted A-2, A-3 and A-6 for the acts of grievous hurt and hurt caused by themselves to the deceased and sentenced them as aforesaid. The State has not preierred an appeal against the acquittal. But the aggrieved complainant (P.W-3) preferred a revision, Cr.R.C. No. 745 of 1964 which 1 shall consider after the appeal. The State, however, has preferred a revision for enhancement of the sentence, which is Cr. R.C, No. 604 of 1964.

(3.) In the said circumstances, the appeal in the main is restricted to the proof or otherwise of individual acts of grievous hurt and hurt alleged to have been caused by the the convicted persons to the deceased. It would suffice if reference is made generally to the prosecution case which was thus : All the accused belonged to a faction led by the 1st accused. The and accused was the right hand man of the 1st accused and they were hostile to the deceased and some of the prosecution witnesses. The deceased was the main target of the accused faction on account of personal jealousies between A-2 and the deceased and A-1 and the deceased. The deceased was a weaver, and so was A-1. Both of them had looms on which they wove sarees and carried on business. There was therefore rivalry in business between A-1 and the deceased. A-2 had personal grudges against the deceased for many reasons : Firstly the deceased was elected as a ' Pinna "Pedda ' of Kummetha channel in preference to the and accused about a year or so prior to the occurrence. As Pinna Pedda he was directing distribution of water to the ryots. He levied a fine from A-2 as a Pinna Pedda for an alleged default of his. The deceased did not give him water out of turn. The and accused owed Rs. 650 to the deceased under a pronote, Exhibit P-21 dated a and July, 1960, and the deceased was demanding the money due thereon. 4 or 5 days prior to the occurrence he threatened to file a suit against A-2. About 4 days prior to the incident when the deceased refused to let water to A-2's field out of turn, A-a left in a huff uttering threatening words. There were security proceedings in 1955 where A-1, A-2, A-5 and A-6 and others were arrayed as one party and the deceased and P.Ws. 1 to 3 and others were arrayed as the opposite party in M.G. Nos. 124 and 125 of 1955 on the file of the Fast Class Magistrate, Ananthapur. Por these reasons it was alleged by the prosecution that accused 1 to 8 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on 1st November, 1963, with the common object of killing the deceased, that the and accused was armed with a ' Medi Thoka ' (plough handle), M.O. 1 and A-3 and A-6 were armed with spears and A-1, A-4, A-5, A-7 and A-8 were armed with sticks, that they lay in wait in ' Maddalamadi Pora Channel and that at about 1 P.M. they attacked the deceased in the filed of Angadala Veeranna, known as ' Maddalamadi when he was proceeding to see his Ragi field along with P.W. 1 and that the deceased succumbed to the injuries at about 4 P.M. the same day at the place where he was attacked. P.W. 1 was accompanying the deceased at that time. He was an eye-witness to the occurrence. The prosecution has examined P.W. a, a resident of Narasapuram also as an eye-witness.